FPB SEIAS PRESENTATION: THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS DATE: 23 MAY 2017

PRESENTATION OUTLINE Introduction and background Application of SEIAS Process followed on the FPB SEIAS Key issues that emerged on SEIAS Conclusion

1. Introduction Implementation Date: 01 October 2015 The Socio-Economic Impact Assessment System (SEIAS) was introduced by Cabinet in February 2015 The primary objective of SEIAS is to assists departments to better formulate policies, legislation & regulations and ensure: Alignment with national priorities in promoting inclusive growth, addressing inequality, spatial imbalances, and environmental degradation Risks associated with the implementation of such laws are thereof mitigated, thus unintended consequences are minimised Costs of implementing such prescripts are reduced while benefits by the deprived service recipients are optimised; and Regulatory burden is reduced, thus a better and efficient administrative mechanisms of implementing the national priorities All new/ review/ amendment Policies, Legislations and Regulations –Cabinet/ Internally approved by EAs Implementation Date: 01 October 2015

Introduction…. (2) Thought through process and NOT a compliance driven mechanism with another “tick-box” to complete The rationale behind policy/ legislation development or review Anticipate the implementation and readiness We are always looking at socio-economic costs/benefits and risks and not only at quantifiable economic costs.

2. Application of SEIAS

3. Process followed PC invited DPME to present SEIAS in October 2016-decision to subject FP Amendment Bill to SEIAS An interactive process- DPME supported DoC on the application of SEIAS for the Bill in Oct 2016 DoC and FP Board assessed the costs for implementation of the Bill and did further consultations with stakeholders Final draft SEIAS report was submitted to DPME in Nov 2016 for further analysis QA sign off form was issued on the 15 Dec 2016

4. SEIAS raises a number of key issues: About 53.5% of households have at least one member who has access to internet and highest where internet is accessed is through mobile phones (47.6%), home (9.6%), 15.0% at work and 9.3% at internet café or educational facilities. About 80.8% of households have televisions - using the research by FBP/ Unisa of May 2015 indicates that Children are main decision makers of watching DVDs at home Stricter and enforcement at Cinemas (Age Restriction and Classification Guidelines)-although violent content is a concern Age restrictions and classification guidelines are less important when choosing movies to watch on DVD at home Parental involvement and control at home is limited Exposure to violent content and imitation behaviors

SEIAS raises a number of key issues…(2) Sexual content, violence and horror have the most observable impact on children 7 to 17 years old The cinema environment plays a significant role on the impact of movies content Gaming is extremely popular among children 7 to 17 years but the perceived impact of gaming on thoughts and behavior is less due to the fact that games are animated and seen as not real Children’s Amendment Act no 41 of 2007, describes Early Childhood Development as a process of emotional, cognitive, sensory, spiritual, moral, physical, social and communication development of children from birth to school going age. Exposure to harmful content can distort the above comprehensive aspects of childhood development as it could have adverse psychological and behavioral impacts on children. In addition the NDP and study on ECD provides evidence that delays in cognitive and overall development before schooling can have long lasting and costly consequences to children, families and society.

Consultations and disputes… (3) Having considered the views of the Portfolio Committee: Consultation on the implementation of the proposed FPB amendments has been limited amongst government affected stakeholder such as those in basic education, members of the security cluster and other departments There are likely to be overlaps, scope creep and non-alignment if FPB amendments are not in line with such as those in the with other primary legislation such as the Sexual Offences and Related Matters Act, Criminal Justice Act for instance it is likely to impact on its effectiveness Insufficient consideration has been given on the cost and likely risk of failure to those departments or institutions who are required to enforce the legislation It is also crucial to consider whether the FPB amendments pass constitutional muster?

Cost and Regulatory efficiency…(4) Failing to fully understand the full cost of implementation is likely to lead to policy and regulatory failure. The UNISA study makes a number of recommendations which is reflected in the FBA amendments – for instance more awareness and education of the guidelines, Departments that can positively contribute are Basic Education (children and parents), Telecommunications and Postal Services (e-literacy campaigns), Social Development and Private Sector or tighter police enforcement measures (SAPS, NPA) Response by the above departments on costs are not articulated in the report suggesting that DoC has to consult and agree on areas of support and identify resource allocations and shortfalls and how shortfalls will addressed This will require to consult much widely and agree on joint planning and proactive resource allocations by different groups at least from government

Cost and Regulatory efficiency…. (5) Regulatory burden?- high compliance and implementation costs- ways of attracting compliance-streamlining and improving turnaround times for classification decisions for those directly affected Concerns have been raised on the disproportionate effect this will have on smaller players in the space There is no distinction between company size and may limit smaller players entering the space given the level of compliance Collaboration with other departments and private sector can minimise the education and awareness costs Failure to be clear on costs such as an appropriate tariff structure and fees, upfront, creates uncertainty to the industry The study to determine tariff and fee structure should run in parallel and should be in line with this process to avoid uncertainty

Managing Risks ….(6) Change comes with risks, need a proactive mitigation strategies Identified risks that can affect implementation: IT related, poor public participation, fragmented approach, potential litigations and resources DoC needs to be clear on the institutional arrangements in government with clear functions, roles and responsibilities in the Bill to ensure effective implementation and avoid risk of failure This is important given the multi-departmental roles and responsibility of implementing the FPB Litigation costs can be avoided by simplifying dispute resolution mechanism. A dispute settlement mechanisms other than the use of Courts is required to ensure speedy and less costly resolutions of conflict where it arises.

Monitoring and Evaluation… (7) Monitor whether the Legislation is addressing the problems identified- if not, early interventions to address bottlenecks The Bill considered the strengthening of compliance monitoring and enforcement for FPB – again this can only be effective if roles, responsibilities and cost are clearly identified and agreed to

Contribution to National Priorities… (8) Social cohesion-reduced harmful effects of violent and explicit content Security- Creating a safe, secured and empowering environment, financial security to the State- cost associated with exposure and to the justice system Regulatory certainty- streamlined thus better investment and reduced costs of compliance-co/self regulatory environment Economic Inclusion-job creation and skills development-training of classifiers (gaming and film industry) and protection of online distributors of films and games against piracy

5. Conclusion and Recommendations Does the Bill comply with the constitution and subsequent jurisprudence? DPME to support DoC in convening a government stakeholder workshop to present the Bill and SEIAS report Required to ensure that we address implementation challenges that are arise Develop adequate coordination strategy to achieve the objects of the Bill Ensure roles, responsibilities and costs are identified and addressed Address external stakeholder concerns Costs and uncertainty are immediately addressed in relation to the proposed fee and tariff structure DoC to immediately commission a study on the proposed fee and tariff structure to run in parallel with the current process SEIAS will be done to ensure we address potential economic and/or social risks as well as potential unintended consequences

Conclusion and Recommendations …(2) Bill must address the potential disproportionate effect Is this likely to effect small players more than bigger private sector players? Is this likely to effect local industry disproportionately to well established and better resourced international players Further work is required to understand the effect of gaming on children

Ke ya leboga Ke a leboha Ke a leboga Ngiyabonga Ndiyabulela Ngiyathokoza Ngiyabonga Inkomu Ndi khou livhuha Thank you Dankie seias@dpme.gov.za